MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Life-Cycle Inventory of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Two Hydropower Projects in China

2007· article· en· W2136010411 on OpenAlexaff
Qinfen Zhang, Bryan Karney, Heather L. MacLean, Jing‐Chun Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Infrastructure Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCarnegie Mellon University
KeywordsGreenhouse gasHydropowerLife-cycle assessmentRenewable energyLife cycle inventoryEnvironmental scienceSustainabilityElectricityElectricity generationEnvironmental impact assessmentEnvironmental engineeringProduction (economics)Natural resource economicsEngineeringEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two different sized hydropower projects in China, one with a capacity of 44MW and the other of 3,600MW, were examined through life-cycle assessment (LCA) from the perspective of both sustainability and environmental impact and the influence of project scale. Using the economic input-output based LCA approach, energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were quantified. The resulting energy payback ratios were found to be 7 and 48, whereas the normalized GHG emissions were 44 and 6gCO2 equivalent per kW h of electricity production, both in favor of the larger project. Compared with published data on other renewable and nonrenewable options, temperate hydropower, particularly large hydropower, is indicated as an efficient electrical source with relatively low GHG emissions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Infrastructure SystemsSame topicWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesFrench-language works237,207